CHILD FRIENDLY MOBILITY

Presented by:Ms. Vijaya Rohini Kodati & Ms. Revathy Pradeep

Urban Transport PlannerInstitute of Urban Transport (India)

Structure of Presentation

• Introduction

• Objectives

• Literature Review

• Methodology

• Data Analysis

• Self-Assessment Checklist

Introduction

• Children below 18 years comprise two-fifths of the

total population.

• Out of total fatal accidents- 6% children are affected

• Urban Transport System is not completely

inclusiveness as child mobility issues are almost

neglected.

Need to give importance to CHILD MOBILITY

Child mobility needsare often neglected

Objectives

• To identify issues and

problems associated with

children’s mobility in cities

• To prepare guidelines in

form of Self-assessment

checklist with score card

SCHOOL AHEAD

KIDS CROSSING

LITERATURE REVIEW

Policy Review

–Encouraging integrated land use &

transport planning

–Encouraging greater use of public

transport and non-motorized transport

–Introducing Intelligent Transport

Systems for traffic management

–Addressing concerns of road safety and

trauma response

NUTP NTDPC

12th FYP NMSH

Least research area and need to be considered at Planning and DesignStage

National Urban Transport Policy, 2006

Major awareness campaign in Green Travel Habits and seek the support of the State

Government in its implementation. Particular emphasis is laid on bringing awareness amongst

children through inputs in their school curricula.

National Transport Development Policy Committee (NTDPC)

Reduce speed for improving pedestrian safety through traffic calming measures and wider

pedestrian paths especially in school zones. Security of children commuting in a systematic

manner.

12th Five Year Plan

No easy access to schools particulary to the girl students to facilitate the continuance of their

studies

National Road Safety Policy, 2010

• Road Traffic Safety Educationand Training

– Road safety knowledge &awareness amongst thepopulation through education,training and publicitycampaigns.

– Road safety education forschool children and collegegoing students

Udgam School for Children, Ahmedabad

Awareness & Enforcement

Smart Cities & AMRUT Mission

Both the missions provide for:

• Pedestrian walkways,

• Non-motorised transport

• Public transport facilities,

• Enhance amenity value of cities by

creating & upgrading green

spaces, parks and recreation

centres, especially for children.

Priority - Sustainable Urban Transport

Playground in vicinity of house Encourage Cycling Sidewalks encouraging walking

Priority given to cyclists atintersection

Low entry vehicles Playground in neighbourhood

Pathway in London, UK Child friendly signage: Italy Education Awareness in school

Best practices / case studies

METHODOLOGY

City Selection City Typologyand Topography

City size andStructure

Demographics(Child Population)

School SelectionPhysicalbarrier’s

dividing the city

Type of School(Pvt or Govt)

Based on RoadHierarchy of

adjacent road

Primary DataCollection Road inventory User opinion Reconnaissance

survey

Secondary DataCollection

List of SchoolsPvt. & Govt.

Schools

Accident Dataof Children (<

18 years)

City Maps withSchool Location

Data Analysis Identification ofIssues

Self AssessmentChecklist

City Selection Criteria

CityTypology

andTopography

• Socio-economic,Administrative, Tourist

• Hilly / Plain terrain

City size andstructure

Small, medium and largecities

Demographics(child

population)

Child population below 18years, above / below

national average (41%)

Name of city State Type of cityPopulation 2011 (approx. in

millions)Percentage of child

population(0-18 years)

Agra Uttar Pradesh Tourist 1.58 43%Bhopal Madhya Pradesh Capital City 1.79 38%

Hapur Uttar PradeshIndustrial andcommercial city

0.26 44%

Shimla Himachal PradeshTourist, educationaland administrative

0.16 30%

City Selection Criteria

Name of city State Type of cityPopulation 2011 (approx. in

millions)Percentage of child

population(0-18 years)Agra Uttar Pradesh Tourist 1.58 43%Bhopal Madhya Pradesh Capital City 1.79 38%

Hapur Uttar PradeshIndustrial andcommercial city

0.26 44%

Shimla Himachal PradeshTourist,educational andadministrative

0.16 30%

Graph showingpopulation of child in

the age group0-18 years

Two cities each aboveand below national

average

School Selection Criteria

• The general roadnetwork and physicalbarriers of the city isstudied

• One each of Effluent &Informal Localities

Physicalbarriers

• Government• Private

Type of school• School near to Arterial

Road• School – interior location

Hierarchy ofadjacent road

Data Analysis

• An opinion survey, Road inventory & Recy survey was conducted in four cities: Hapur,

Shimla, Agra and Bhopal

• Over thousand children of varying ages were interviewed, We also interviewed more

than 50 teachers and principal

7%6% 4%

3%

13%

40%

16%

9%2%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Safety and Comfort Infrastructure Traffic Education

Perc

enta

ge(%

)

No

Yes

• Only 24% of children have attended traffic awareness programs conducted at schools• More 50% of children commute by cycle and walk but they don’t have adequate safety means onroad infrastructure.

ISSUES & FINDINGS

• Schools adjacent toArterial roads areprone to higher levelsof pollution

• No safe access totransport modes

Physicalbarriers

• Lack of organisedschool transport

• Govt. school childrenare provided with buspasses, but thefrequency is low

Infrastructure• Absence of Footpaths,

safe crossings, roadmarkings & signages /signals

• Encroachment on thepath of schoolslocated in the interiors

Hierarchy ofadjacent road

Issues

Children are forced to use unsafe transport mode

Findings• Average trip length of private school children (5.8 km) is

higher than government school children (3 km)• Rate of girl child dropouts is increasing due to unsafe public

transport• No traffic management in the vicinity of the schools - before

/ after school hours• More than 75% schools does not have traffic awareness

programs• 82% of govt. schools are located in interiors without any safe

accessibility• The children in hill cities have to walk atleast 3 km to access

any transport modeSchools Located in the Interior wont be accessible in case of

emergency

SELF ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST

• This checklist has been divided into twosections; which are for:– Urban Local Bodies– School

Self Assessment Checklist - Parameters

Safety &Comfort Infrastructure Mobility of

Children Inclusiveness Education

CHECKLIST FOR URBAN LOCALBODIES

Safety and Comfort

ENVIRONMENTALEFFECTS

Air Pollution

NoisePollution

WALK

Gradecrossingsafety

Obstructions

Signages

CYCLING

Lighting

Signages

PUBLICTRANSPORT

Presence OfGuard Railsor hand rails

Overcrowded(peak hourcondition)

First aid box

Fireextinguisher

Infrastructure

NONMOTORISEDTRANSPORT

Footpath(width >1.8m)

Cycle Track(width >1.8m)

Cycle parkingat transitstations

SCHOOL BUS

Availability

Bus parkingspace

INTERMEDIATEPARA TRANSIT

Baggage space

Designatedparking spaces

size(2.3x3.5)

PUBLICTRANSPORT

Bus stops

Accessiblestops

WALKABILITY

Walking pathmodal conflict

Availability offootpath

Motoristbehaviour

Amenities

CYCLABILITY

Conflict withvehicles

Availability ofcycle tracks

Motoristbehaviour

Quality of ridingsurface

Availability ofcycle parking at

schools

USABILITY OFPUBLIC

TRANSPORT

Time Schedule

Stopping AtDesignated Stop

Sensitive towardssafety of children

Ventilation InBuses

EDUCATION

Traffic rulesawarenessprogram

CHECKLIST FOR SCHOOLS

SAFETY

TrafficManagement (at

opening andclosing hours)

Safe access totransport modes

INFRASTRUCTURE

Parking

Transport Facility

INCLUSIVENESS

Disabled friendly

AffordableTransport for all

Girl child safety

Children below 8

EDUCATION

Traffic rulesadded to

curriculum